Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
85 percent of the account holders lost money after opening an Express IRA account
wow
perfect example why letting people manage their own retirement money isn't a guarantee of having a secure retirement.
our little friend's view is merely self serving and selfish... not a reflection of what really works in the real world
don't get me wrong... he's certainly not someone I would go out of my way to choose... but at least he has some measure of integrity unlike Bush... and he has a brain which would be a big improvement as well.
I certainly hope we have better choices in 2008.
I was quoting your post...
suppose I could start a list of your one liners like I did for gp... naw... not worth the effort.
Karl Rove taught them well!
I'd consider voting for McCain...
...but never for Rice of the other spoiled brat
You're full of shit
...criticized the church leadership on "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox News Channel
that says it all...
Meanwhile, cable news commentators Tucker Carlson and Lou Dobbs have questioned whether the church should maintain its tax-exempt status, given its political activism on immigration
and that's hilarious given how the GOP has pandered to the christian right!
thanks... guess we have just a bit longer to go
it was an awful feeling... the person who respresents our country to be so disgraced...
Bush is an embarrassment as well
yeap, you're right about that... and I think ergo just identified one of those groups
cause they've been trained to have "faith"... to obey without question
I see some still trying to justify Vietnam... there are some who will never admit that the US makes a mistake and is sometimes the bad guy and not the good guy.
good article.
I wonder what the poll numbers were for Nixon when he resigned... I remember that time though. Even after he resigned, people were distrustfull for a long time.
and the really depressing part is thinking that there are still 30 something percent of the people out there in that category
... that many of Bush supports are rock stupid and can't think beyond a result and what it really takes to achieve a result.
I have already come to the conclusion that any that are still Bush supporters at this time are definitely so stupid and/or bullheaded you'll never get through to them
good way to help.
fighting over easy prey :)
great point!
that argument is so illogical... you really have to dismiss those still trying to stand behind it... or ignore them :)
"The best and most beautiful things cannot be seen or touched -
they must be felt with the heart."
~Helen Keller~
too true...
some where along the line "liberal" became a derrogatory label and it always suprises me when you look at the definition of the word:
Not limited to or by established, traditional, orthodox, or authoritarian attitudes, views, or dogmas; free from bigotry.
Favoring proposals for reform, open to new ideas for progress, and tolerant of the ideas and behavior of others; broad-minded.
Tending to give freely; generous:
but now being a 'realist' is a bad thing? LOL that's really too much!
Democracy Push by Bush Attracts Doubters in Party
They also argue that heavy-handed pressure has strained American relations with Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China, making it harder to enlist them in fighting terrorism, stabilizing the Middle East and curbing nuclear weapons.
<< and this is an prime example of head in sand mentality... gee it's not working but we'll stay the course... >>
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is traveling this week in South America, Asia and Australia in part to promote democracy, acknowledges the growing dissent but says the administration will stick to its goals.
<< and really, this is the reality >>
One prominent neoconservative, Francis Fukuyama, asserts in a new book that the administration embraced democracy as a cornerstone of its policy only after the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq. The issue was seized upon to justify the war in retrospect, and then expanded for other countries, he says.
By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
Published: March 17, 2006
Even as it presents an updated national security strategy, the Bush administration is facing fresh doubts from some Republicans who say its emphasis on promoting democracy around the world has come at the expense of protecting other American interests.
The second thoughts signify a striking change in mood over one of President Bush's cherished tenets, pitting Republicans who call themselves realists against the neoconservatives who saw the invasion of Iraq as a catalyst for change and who remain the most vigorous advocates of a muscular American campaign to foster democratic movements.
"You are hearing more and more questions about the administration's approach on this issue," said Lorne W. Craner, president of the International Republican Institute, a foundation linked to the Republican Party that supports democratic activities abroad. "The 'realists' in the party are rearing their heads and asking, 'Is this stuff working?' "
The critics, who include Senators Chuck Hagel of Nebraska and Richard G. Lugar of Indiana and Representative Henry J. Hyde of Illinois, as well as Henry Kissinger and Brent Scowcroft, are alarmed at the costs of military operations and of nation-building in Iraq and Afghanistan.
They have also been shaken by the victory of Hamas in Palestinian elections in January and by the gains Islamists scored in elections in Iraq, Egypt and Lebanon.
The administration, with support from legislators like Senators John McCain of Arizona and Sam Brownback of Kansas, contends that whatever their outcome, elections are better than violent upheaval. But critics worry that antidemocratic extremists will prevail wherever tradition and existing civil institutions are too weak to protect the rights of minorities or to nurture moderates.
They also argue that heavy-handed pressure has strained American relations with Egypt, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Russia and China, making it harder to enlist them in fighting terrorism, stabilizing the Middle East and curbing nuclear weapons.
The renewed violence in Iraq since the voting there has discredited, in their view, the promise of democracy as an outlet for tensions, bringing sectarian parties— and their affiliated militias — to the fore.
"You cannot in my opinion just impose a democratic form of government on a country with no history and no culture and no tradition of democracy," said Senator Hagel.
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is traveling this week in South America, Asia and Australia in part to promote democracy, acknowledges the growing dissent but says the administration will stick to its goals.
"There is a debate, and I think it's a debate that's healthy," she said. "This is obviously a really big change in American foreign policy, to put the promotion of democracy at the center of it. And people take very seriously what this president is doing and intends to do."
Mr. Bush's intent is clear from the very first sentence of the national security strategy paper issued yesterday: "It is the policy of the United States to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world." The 49-page document calls this task "the work of generations."
It names as strongholds of tyranny North Korea, Iran, Syria, Cuba, Belarus, Myanmar and Zimbabwe. It gives the United States credit for toppling Saddam Hussein and the Taliban, and cites "some preliminary steps" toward democracy in Saudi Arabia and "more open but still flawed" elections in Egypt. It says that the Palestinian voting was "free, fair and inclusive" but that democratic principles "are tested by the victory of Hamas."
The concern, expressed by Representative Hyde, chairman of the International Relations Committee, is that the administration views democracy as a "magic formula."
"Implanting democracy in large areas would require that we possess an unbounded power and undertake an open-ended commitment of time and resources, which we cannot and will not do," he said.
William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard, said: "What's really driving the criticism is disenchantment with the war. But it's unfair to say that supporters of the war thought it was going to be easy to build a democracy in Iraq."
Even many supporters of the democracy program say the administration's miscalculations in Iraq have done damage to the cause.
"I think this administration tends to have the right general policies but to be remarkably unwilling to look at how weak their instruments of implementation are," said Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker.
The American effort has also stirred controversy abroad. This year the United States is spending $1.7 billion to support groups seeking political change, but lately Russia, Egypt, China and many countries in Africa and Latin America have cracked down on these groups.
Senator McCain, a leading proponent of the program, said that despite these setbacks and controversies, and the lack of civilian structures and rule of law in many countries, the administration was right to push for democracy and elections.
"The moral of the story is that democracy is tough," he said. "We have to recognize that you can have two steps forward and one step back."
The issue of which should come first — civil society and rule of law, or elections — was underscored by the Hamas victory. Before the Palestinian elections, Washington had pressed for a law requiring political candidates to disavow racism and lawlessness, but was rebuffed.
"There's an assumption here that somehow you can neatly build a civil society, and neatly build the habits of democracy, and then you take off the authoritarian hat and everything's in place for democracy to rise," Ms. Rice said, when asked about such criticism. "I just don't think it works that way in the real world."
One prominent neoconservative, Francis Fukuyama, asserts in a new book that the administration embraced democracy as a cornerstone of its policy only after the failure to find unconventional weapons in Iraq. The issue was seized upon to justify the war in retrospect, and then expanded for other countries, he says.
Mr. Fukuyama, who opposed the war in Iraq, said in an interview that it was naïve and contrary to the tenets of conservatism for the United States to think that it could act as midwife or cheerleader for democracy in societies it knows little about.
Indeed, as he points out, in the 2000 election campaign, both Mr. Bush and Ms. Rice, then his foreign policy adviser, criticized the Clinton administration's interventions to promote democracy in Somalia, Haiti and the Balkans as misplaced idealism.
"It's this weird situation, where you have a really conservative Republican president using all this Clintonesque rhetoric about rights and ideals," Mr. Fukuyama said.
Administration officials say they are guided not by naïveté but by hard-nosed necessity. If authoritarian governments in the Middle East do not open themselves to reform, extremists will eventually blow them up, they say.
Mr. Craner, of the International Republican Institute, who was an assistant secretary of state for democracy, human rights and labor in Mr. Bush's first term, said that at least rhetorically, Republicans generally supported democracy and were likely to continue doing so.
Even such leaders of the "realist" camp, like Mr. Kissinger, a former secretary of state, and Mr. Scowcroft, national security adviser under the first President Bush, say they support democracy as a major part of American foreign policy.
But in an echo of the cold war debates over whether to confront or negotiate with the Soviet Union, both have also warned that the United States should not risk alienating crucial allies or fomenting unrest by demanding rapid internal change.
Mr. Kissinger noted in a commentary last year, for example, "The United States is probably the only country in which 'realist' can be used as a pejorative epithet."
But the leaders of the cause are not backing down.
"Obviously, we want stability and we want allies in the war on terror," said one, Representative David Dreier, Republican of California. "But I don't think we should back down from democratization just because it's hard."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/17/politics/17democracy.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slogin
"invading" should have been left out of that sentence... my typo.
show me where I or anyone on this board ever sad Saddam was a good guy...
did you see the concern in my post about our soldiers lives also lost?
you can't get anything straight... not he facts about 911 or Iraq... or what people's positions are.
waste of time talking to you. dont' expect further responses.
I think there may have been more who had the same opinion... I think the local store in the local mall has disappeared.
got more info on that?
when will you get that invading 911 had nothing to do with Iraq? Pre-emptively invading Iraq was like arresting and executing the wrong guy for a crime they didn't commit. You'd probably justify that by saying he was thinking about committing another crime. Is that how it should work?
And guess you think it's okay that our soldiers have died and that tens of thousands innocent Iraq women, children, etc., have died because of the deception of our administration.
at least five years ago a friend of mine told me I should read them... I have to admit I am enjoying them.
okay... after Mr. Potter :)
I could resist keeping on reading... so I'm reading number 5 now...
what did you think?
and to you too!
this board has been quiet for a while
LOL
nobody doesn't like Sara Lee...
lol... how long do they let you keep it?
yes!!!
no matter what you do, you can't win.
and don't forget that often "welfare" mothers are such because the dad's skipped out on their responsibilities.
Bush Reaffirms Pre-Emptive Use of Force
<< this is a main reason why Bush should be impeached asap >>
By DEB RIECHMANN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 3 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Undaunted by the difficult war in Iraq, President Bush reaffirmed his strike-first policy against terrorists and enemy nations on Thursday and said Iran may pose the biggest challenge for America.
In a 49-page national security report, the president said diplomacy is the U.S. preference in halting the spread of nuclear and other heinous weapons.
"If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self defense, we do not rule out the use of force before attacks occur — even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack," Bush wrote.
Titled "National Security Strategy," the report summarizes Bush's plan for protecting America and directing U.S. relations with other nations. It is an updated version of a report Bush issued in 2002.
In the earlier report a year after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush underscored his administration's adoption of a pre-emptive policy, marking the end of a deterrent military strategy that dominated the Cold War.
The latest report makes it clear Bush hasn't changed his mind, even though no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq.
"When the consequences of an attack with weapons of mass destruction are potentially so devastating, we cannot afford to stand idly by as grave dangers materialize. ... The place of pre-emption in our national security strategy remains the same," Bush wrote.
The report had harsh words for Iran. It accused the regime of supporting terrorists, threatening Israel and disrupting democratic reform in Iraq. Bush said diplomacy to halt Tehran's suspected nuclear weapons work must prevail to avert a conflict.
"This diplomatic effort must succeed if confrontation is to be avoided," Bush said.
He did not say what would happen if international negotiations with Iran failed. The Bush administration currently is working to persuade Russia and China to support a proposed U.N. Security Council resolution demanding that Iran end its uranium enrichment program.
A top Iranian official said Thursday that his country was ready to open direct talks with the United States over Iraq, marking a major shift in Tehran's foreign policy a day after an Iraqi leader called for such talks. Ali Larijani, Iran's top nuclear negotiator and secretary of the country's Supreme National Security Council, told reporters that any talks between the United States and Iran would deal only with Iraqi issues.
But any direct dialogue between Tehran and Washington — were it to happen — also could be a beginning for negotiations between the two foes over Iran's suspect nuclear program.
Washington, which repeatedly has accused Iran of meddling in Iraq's affairs and of sending weapons and men to help insurgents in Iraq, had no immediate response.
Bush also had tough words for North Korea, which he said poses a serious nuclear proliferation challenge, counterfeits U.S. currency, traffics in narcotics, threatens its neighbors and starves its people.
"The North Korean regime needs to change these polices, open up its political system and afford freedom to its people," Bush said. "In the interim, we will continue to take all necessary measures to protect our national and economic security against the adverse effects of their bad conduct."
Bush issued rebukes to Russia and China and called Syria a tyranny that harbors terrorists and sponsors terrorist activity.
On Russia, Bush said recent trends show a waning commitment to democratic freedoms and institutions. "Strengthening our relationship will depend on the policies, foreign and domestic, that Russia adopts," he said.
The United States also is nudging China down a road of reform and openness.
"China's leaders must realize, however, that they cannot stay on this peaceful path while holding on to old ways of thinking and acting that exacerbate concerns throughout the region and the world," Bush wrote.
He said these "old ways" include enlarging China's military in a non-transparent way, expanding trade, yet seeking to direct markets rather than opening them up, and supporting energy-rich nations without regard to their misrule or misbehavior at home or abroad.
In 2002, when he sent his first report to Congress, Bush was struggling to persuade U.S. allies to join an offensive to topple Saddam Hussein.
Since then, the oppressive Taliban regime in Afghanistan was replaced by a freely elected government. In Iraq, citizens voted in the nation's first free election, a constitution was passed by referendum and nearly 12 million Iraqis elected a permanent government.
Challenges remain in Iraq, where sectarian violence threatens the fragile government and the U.S. death toll has topped 2,300. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has said Iraq's political transition will take a couple of years. Earlier this week, the Pentagon announced it was moving about 700 additional U.S. troops into Iraq from Kuwait because of the escalating killings there and fears that a Shiite holiday would spark even more violence.
"When the Iraqi government, supported by the coalition, defeats the terrorists, terrorism will be dealt a critical blow," Bush said, acknowledging that the fight against terrorism was far from over.
The report is laden with strategies for advancing democracy across the globe, a theme of Bush's second inaugural address.
The president said his administration was advancing this goal by holding high-level meetings at the White House with democratic reformers in repressive nations; using foreign aid to support fair elections, women's rights and religious freedom; and pushing to abolish human trafficking.
Countering suggestions that he favors a go-it-alone approach to foreign policy, Bush emphasized multilateral problem-solving.
"Many of the problems we face — from the threat of pandemic disease to proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, to terrorism, to human trafficking, to natural disasters — reach across borders," he said.
"Effective multinational efforts are essential to solve these problems. Yet history has shown that only when we do our part will others do theirs. America must continue to lead."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060316/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_national_security_5;_ylt=AlFFW3CmgfLmOcuP25l...
lol...
but that's the thing too... I'm sure we'll all face the problems being caused by the fiscal irresponsibility long before we're gone.
petition for paper ballots... I've posted quite a few times on this topic and think it should be the number one issue... because if our votes don't count, we have lost our voice
http://tools.democracyforamerica.com/petition/paperballot/